March 2026 – Online Safety

The Online Safety for Teenagers project was recently presented at the Psychology of Misinformation Symposium, hosted by the University of Amsterdam. The event brought together a diverse audience of Communication Science students, academic researchers, youth organisations, and educators working in creative fields. This interdisciplinary setting created a valuable space for dialogue on how misinformation, online behaviour, and youth engagement intersect.

The session featured contributions from:

Elizaveta Galatina, Director of My Society and coordinator of the Erasmus+ project Online Safety for Teenagers
Ambika Ahuja, PhD researcher on citizen corrections and misinformation (University of Amsterdam)
Jolan Urkens, PhD candidate at ASCoR focusing on misinformation, organisations, and trust
Jiayi Yan, Research Master student in Communication Science (UvA) and Selection Assistant at NIAS

Bridging Research and Practice

A central strength of the symposium was its combination of theoretical insight and applied practice. While academic speakers explored mechanisms of misinformation and trust, Elizaveta Galatina’s presentation grounded the discussion in real-world youth work and intervention design.

Her contribution focused on the Erasmus+ project Online Safety: Protecting Teenagers from Antisocial Behaviour on Social Media, highlighting both empirical findings and practical tools developed through the project.

What Teenagers Experience Online

One of the most striking insights presented was the prevalence of harmful online experiences among teenagers. Project data shows that:

Only 23% of teenagers reported never experiencing unwanted behaviour online

This finding reinforces a critical point often discussed in misinformation research: exposure to harmful or manipulative content is not an exception—it is a norm for many young people.

The presentation also addressed the ongoing policy debate around social media bans for minors, contrasting institutional approaches with teenagers’ own perspectives. Key takeaways included:

Bans are often easily bypassed
Social media is deeply embedded in identity formation
Teenagers prefer education and guidance over restriction
Young people want to actively participate in designing solutions

This aligns closely with contemporary communication science research, which emphasises participatory approaches and media literacy over top-down control.

From Problem to Intervention: Nonviolent Communication (NVC)

A major focus of the presentation was a practical intervention tested within the project: Nonviolent Communication (NVC) as a tool to reduce online aggression.

The approach introduces a simple response structure:

Observation
Feeling
Need
Request

Rather than escalating conflict, teenagers are encouraged to articulate emotional responses and set boundaries constructively. For example, instead of replying with insults, a response might reframe the interaction:

Express how the comment felt
Emphasize the need for respectful dialogue
Invite a more constructive exchange

This method is particularly relevant in the context of misinformation, where emotionally charged interactions often amplify polarisation and reduce openness to correction.

Testing and Implementation

The presentation also outlined concrete project outputs:

Pilot workshops conducted in the Netherlands and Sweden
Development of an educational programme for youth workers
Creation of tools to support teenagers in navigating antisocial online behaviour

This implementation-oriented approach was particularly well received by educators and youth practitioners attending the symposium, who are often seeking actionable methods rather than purely theoretical frameworks.

Why This Matters for Misinformation Research

Addressing misinformation is not only about correcting false content. It is about transforming the social dynamics of online interaction.

Aggression, identity, and emotional responses play a central role in how misinformation spreads and persists. By equipping young people with communication tools that foster respect and reflection, interventions like NVC may indirectly strengthen resilience against misinformation.

The symposium demonstrated the value of collaboration between academia and practice. For the Online Safety for Teenagers project, it also opened opportunities to:

Further validate intervention methods through research partnerships
Integrate communication science insights into training materials
Expand dissemination among educators and youth organisations

These exchanges are essential for ensuring that solutions are both evidence-based and practically applicable.

On March 5, project partners conducted the workshop “Empathy against Misinformation” for students of the Communication Science program at the University of Amsterdam.

Last year, during workshops with teenagers in the Netherlands and Sweden, we noticed that participants enjoyed using empathy as a communication tool when responding to aggressive social media comments. Social media users rarely respond to hostility with empathy and understanding, which makes such responses unexpected and disarming.

But can this approach also work when responding to misinformation about marginalized groups such as migrants, ethnic or religious minorities, or people with mental health challenges? Online narratives about these groups are often dehumanizing – denying them dignity and comparing them to animals or diseases. Such narratives are dangerous because dehumanization makes violence against these groups easier to justify and can contribute to social conflict.

So how can we challenge these narratives? Can empathy be used when responding to people who spread them?

This is not easy. It is difficult to feel connected to someone who calls others “pigs” or “cockroaches” or even calls for their “extermination.” However, in this context empathy is not a feeling – it is a communication tool. By identifying the emotion behind a comment (such as fear or anger) and acknowledging the underlying human need (for safety, respect, or belonging), it becomes possible to create a point of connection. Once this connection is established, we can remind the person that fundamental human values should not be violated: people are human beings, not animals.

Did it work? To some extent. Students were able to identify emotions behind dehumanizing comments quite easily. Identifying the needs behind those emotions was more challenging, but they often came down to basic human needs: safety, respect, belonging, understanding the world, and preserving social order. From there, the next step is to challenge the behavior by pointing out that denying others dignity and humanity is not a solution. Everyone has the right to feel safe, respected, and part of their community, including migrants and people with different religious identities.

Empathy can be a powerful tool to counter dehumanizing narratives and reduce hostility online. We plan to continue testing this approach in different contexts.